This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Moonraker88, I am sorry but you definitely have got this the wrong way round in your mind, cutoff is the percentage of the stroke at which the cutoff point occurs, and NOT the amount of the stroke left after cutoff.
I want to add some references later when I have them properly organised. Try:
Bill F 10:36, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
To my mind the reverser, as one of the means of altering cut-off, among other things, belongs in a separate article, linked from here and from Steam locomotive nomenclature
Bill F 11:01, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
"The steam engine is the only engine design that can provide its maximum torque at zero revolutions."
This assertion in the last sentence of the opening paragraph appears to me to be incorrect, since DC electric motors also provide maximum torque at zero revolutions.
In DC electric motors the torque output is proportional to armature current, which is maximum at zero rpm (so producing maximum torque at startup). I therefore propose modifying it to make it specific to heat engines:
"The steam engine is the only heat engine design that can provide its maximum torque at zero revolutions."
pkt_49 05:28, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
The recent L2 header change from "Steam reverser" was necessary, in view of recent additions, but some other changes seem wrong. For example, I don't know why Harry Wainwright chose to use the system, but it certainly wasn't because of the size of his engines: I first encountered one driving one of his H class, a 50-ton 0-4-4. We've also lost the chronology, jumping from 1882 backwards to 1876, then forwards to 1900 or so. Any suggestions? -- Old Moonraker ( talk) 16:23, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
The section on the reversing mechanism has now outgrown the main subject and rather overshadows it. It is time to hive it off to a new page, which could then be merged with Johnson bar. Globbet ( talk) 22:13, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
The proposed destination article has recently been expanded (to good effect) and much of the information here is now duplicated; perhaps only a few items of terminology specific to locomotives would need to be carried over. If accepted, I suggest that the main contributor at the new article be asked to do this as well. -- Old Moonraker ( talk) 11:17, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Moonraker88, I am sorry but you definitely have got this the wrong way round in your mind, cutoff is the percentage of the stroke at which the cutoff point occurs, and NOT the amount of the stroke left after cutoff.
I want to add some references later when I have them properly organised. Try:
Bill F 10:36, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
To my mind the reverser, as one of the means of altering cut-off, among other things, belongs in a separate article, linked from here and from Steam locomotive nomenclature
Bill F 11:01, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
"The steam engine is the only engine design that can provide its maximum torque at zero revolutions."
This assertion in the last sentence of the opening paragraph appears to me to be incorrect, since DC electric motors also provide maximum torque at zero revolutions.
In DC electric motors the torque output is proportional to armature current, which is maximum at zero rpm (so producing maximum torque at startup). I therefore propose modifying it to make it specific to heat engines:
"The steam engine is the only heat engine design that can provide its maximum torque at zero revolutions."
pkt_49 05:28, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
The recent L2 header change from "Steam reverser" was necessary, in view of recent additions, but some other changes seem wrong. For example, I don't know why Harry Wainwright chose to use the system, but it certainly wasn't because of the size of his engines: I first encountered one driving one of his H class, a 50-ton 0-4-4. We've also lost the chronology, jumping from 1882 backwards to 1876, then forwards to 1900 or so. Any suggestions? -- Old Moonraker ( talk) 16:23, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
The section on the reversing mechanism has now outgrown the main subject and rather overshadows it. It is time to hive it off to a new page, which could then be merged with Johnson bar. Globbet ( talk) 22:13, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
The proposed destination article has recently been expanded (to good effect) and much of the information here is now duplicated; perhaps only a few items of terminology specific to locomotives would need to be carried over. If accepted, I suggest that the main contributor at the new article be asked to do this as well. -- Old Moonraker ( talk) 11:17, 30 March 2012 (UTC)